Tom Lantos

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield as much time as she might consume to the distinguished gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson), the author of this legislation. (Ms. WATSON asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks, and include extraneous material.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 5 minutes to my good friend, the distinguished gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to support it as well. At the outset, let me pay tribute to my dear friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson), the author of this resolution, who has done so much to protect intellectual property rights across the globe. Mr. Speaker, a new generation of policymakers have ascended to power in Beijing and with their growth of influence China has begun to play a more responsible and constructive role on the international stage. But as China has assumed its new global commitments, a yawning gap has emerged between Chinese government promises and the reality on the ground. Mr. Speaker, the stark contrast between China's far-reaching international trade commitments and the harsh treatment afforded American companies trying to sell to China is just the latest example of this enormous credibility gap; and, unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, unless senior Chinese officials recognize that they must live up to their international trade commitments, hundreds of thousands of American workers will lose their jobs. Mr. Speaker, the United States trade deficit with China continues to grow at an alarming rate. Last year, in 2003, we had a $124 billion deficit with China, the largest ever posted with any country on the face of this planet. The deficit further widened this January to almost $12 billion. The matter before the House, sponsored by my good friend, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Watson), addresses one of the main reasons for this alarming deficit, the systematic and widespread piracy and counterfeiting of copyrighted U.S. materials in China. Fully 15 to 20 percent of all products made in China are counterfeited products. The market value of these goods in China is estimated to be at least $24 billion. This massive criminal enterprise makes it virtually impossible for U.S. patent holders to sell their goods in China and causes them further economic losses when China exports pirated goods to third countries. The gentlewoman from California's (Ms. Watson) measure demands that China undertake a coordinated nationwide intellectual property rights enforcement campaign as well as implement a legal framework to protect both American and Chinese intellectual property. Mr. Speaker, I strongly urge the regime in Beijing to pay attention to this demand. The U.S. Congress will not tolerate the continued theft of American intellectual property on a massive scale by the Chinese, while the United States is exporting good manufacturing jobs to China by the millions. I urge all of my colleagues to vote for this important initiative. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I urge all my colleagues to support this legislation. I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Vietnam Human Rights Act, and I urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. I first would like to commend the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith), my good friend and most distinguished colleague, for introducing this important legislation and for doggedly pursuing the Vietnam human rights issue as he does, the human rights issues across the globe. None of us here today should be under any illusions about the government of Vietnam. According to the Department of State's human rights report, the Vietnamese government is an unrepentant, authoritarian regime which does not allow political opposition. Freedom of expression does not exist in Vietnam. Vietnamese are locked in prison for simply expressing their political opinions. The Vietnamese government also places severe restrictions on the expression of religious beliefs, particularly upon Buddhists who do not worship as part of the official church and upon Christians in the Vietnamese highlands. With the approval of the U.S.-Vietnam bilateral trade agreement 3 years ago, the political security and economic relationship between the United States and Vietnam has become increasingly complex, but we must continue to send a strong signal to Hanoi that the United States continues to make it a top priority to promote internationally recognized human rights in Vietnam. Passage of the Smith legislation will indicate to the administration and to the Vietnamese government that the Congress expects to see real progress on the human rights front in Vietnam and that we have not forgotten those Vietnamese who are being persecuted for their beliefs. Our legislation will ensure that there is not a rollback in our trade and aid relationship with Vietnam, only a cap on the level of our nonhumanitarian aid to the Vietnamese, unless human rights conditions are met. Mr. Speaker, I again commend my colleague from New Jersey, and I urge all of my colleagues to support the passage of this important bill.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. No, Mr. Speaker. I am strongly in support of this legislation.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend for yielding. I just want to correct the impression the gentleman left with his observation, which implied that Taiwan is getting economic aid from the United States.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support this resolution and urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. The 25th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act is an exceptional opportunity to understand the ongoing and growing relevance of this critically important law and to discuss the future relations between the United States and Taiwan. I want to commend my friend, the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde), and my friend, the gentleman from New Jersey (Chairman Smith), for introducing this resolution and for highlighting the important matters pending in the U.S.-Taiwan relationship. Mr. Speaker, when I first visited Taiwan decades ago, Taiwan's people were governed by an authoritarian regime which silenced independent media, threw the political opposition in jail, and refused to live by internationally recognized human rights. Today, Taiwan has become a fully developed democracy, complete with hard-fought elections, tight margins of victory, and a prosperous economy. This is sort of the American Dream in foreign policy, to look at totalitarian, dictatorial societies which are destitute and see them develop into democratic, prosperous nations. Under the Taiwan Relations Act, Taiwan's GDP has increased ten-fold between 1979 and today. Two-way trade between Taiwan and the United States has grown from $7 billion to over $65 billion during this period. The Taiwan Relations Act has ensured that the United States provides Taiwan with sufficient military equipment to defend itself. Our Nation even sent aircraft carriers into the Taiwan Strait to make it clear that the United States would not abandoned Taiwan to an uncertain fate. In short, Mr. Speaker, the Taiwan Relations Act has effectively provided an institutional framework and a legal basis for a strong political security and economic relationship between Taiwan and the United States. It has proven to be an enormously flexible and durable law which has prevented various administrations from selling out Taiwan and its people due to pressure from Mainland China. The 25th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act gives us a chance to think about new directions in our relationship with Taiwan. We must redouble our efforts to build closer ties to Taiwan, while at the same time maintaining a mutually productive relationship with the PRC. We can have a constructive relationship with Beijing while still protecting Taiwan's core interests. Beijing must understand that, from an American perspective, any settlement between China and Taiwan must be arrived at through peaceful means, without coercion, and with the full support of the people of Taiwan. To ensure that the Taiwanese people are not forced into an unwise deal with Beijing, we must continue to support Taiwan's legitimate defense needs, and the leadership of Taiwan must devote sufficient funds to defending their country. To that end, I strongly support the possible sale of the Aegis system to Taiwan and the expansion of high- level military and political exchanges between our two nations. Mr. Speaker, when President Lee Teng-hui wished to give a speech at his alma mater, Cornell University, it was my great pleasure and privilege to win passage of a resolution demanding that the Department of State grant him a visa. We won that battle, and the world kept spinning. Mr. Speaker, it was a great pleasure for me to host Taiwan's Vice President, Annette Lu, during a recent visit to San Francisco. It is my fondest hope that Congress will have the honor of greeting both President Chen and Vice President Lu in Washington in the foreseeable future. Mr. Speaker, under the umbrella of the Taiwan Relations Act, the United States and Taiwan have brought democracy to 25 million people, secured their economic future and protected them from hostile military threats. This, Mr. Speaker, is an amazing achievement. I strongly support this legislation and urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional requests for time. We yield back the balance of our time, and I urge all of my colleagues to support this legislation.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), my distinguished colleague on the Committee on International Relations.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel).

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I rise in strong support of this all-important resolution. First, I want to pay tribute to my good friend, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence), for taking the leadership on this all-important issue, and to my good friend, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros- Lehtinen), for her powerful, persuasive, passionate statement. I also want to thank, on our side, the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), for her leadership on this issue, and our Democratic whip, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for his passionate dedication in crafting this legislation. Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the International Court of Justice ruled that the security fence being constructed by Israel was a violation of international law and called for its dismantlement. Mr. Speaker, I traveled across that fence, and if I had not been persuaded prior to my physical inspection of the fence that it is a desperately needed security measure, my trip along that fence convinced me forever. Just ask yourself how you would feel if in a neighboring community or across the street there are terrorist gangs who systematically come over to your side and blow up restaurants, places of worship, offices, stores, every facility conceivable. Bus stops. Just anyplace where they can kill innocent human beings. You would be in favor of building a security fence. And the ultimate hypocrisy of this International Court of Justice's decision literally turns my stomach. This ruling was a perversion of justice that infringes on Israel's inherent and basic right of self-defense, and it willfully and cynically ignores Israel's recent success in reducing terrorism, thanks mainly to its security fence. The International Court favored the suicide bombers over their innocent victims when they issued this mindlessly politicized decision. They only succeeded in severely diminishing their stature and authority, which I deeply regret. Let me illustrate, Mr. Speaker. The security fence brought significant relief to the innocent men, women and children who are blown up by terrorists. From September 2000, when the intifada broke out, through 2003, there were more than 80 suicide bombings with Israeli targets. This year, with the fence now playing an important deterrent role, there have been only four. Now, one is too much, but there is a dramatic reduction from that vast number of successful suicide bombings to the much smaller number today. Does this success mean that suicide bombers are giving up? Of course not. But Israel was successful in preventing some 58 suicides bombing attempts within the West Bank just in the last 6 months. The main reason is that the fence is giving Israeli security forces more time to react and to prevent terrorist attacks. The record in Gaza, Mr. Speaker, is even better. With the help of the security fence, there has been only one deadly suicide bombing that originated from there in recent years. Do the judges of the International Court care a whit for the well- being of the average Israeli citizen? Regrettably, the evidence suggests that the majority of them clearly do not. Mr. Speaker, this International Court decision sends a message, and here I quote from the resolution, that there is an international indifference to the safety of the citizens of Israel. This is not only morally offensive, it is potentially politically disastrous for the very feeble peace process. How are Israelis supposed to have the confidence to make peace if the international community that so enthusiastically urges them to make concessions is so callous as to whether they live or die? Mr. Speaker, the international court's opinion highlights the dangers of an international court dealing in abstractions without full information or full briefing from the parties involved. In the first place, Mr. Speaker, the court should never have taken up this case. In the U.N. General Assembly, the resolution passed with support from less than a majority of members of the General Assembly. And during the proceedings, the United States and many of our European friends objected to the court's consideration of this case. But the court did not heed prudence. Instead, it eagerly embraced recklessness and injustice. The court did not take into account the fence as it is. The court took its decision and wrote its judgment deliberately oblivious to the fact that the Israeli Supreme Court was adjudicating cases about the fence. Indeed, the Israeli Supreme Court has considered challenges by Palestinians on the routing of the fence and has obligated the Israeli military to relocate the fence to take into concern more fully the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians. Indeed, Israel's Supreme Court actually revoked military orders that had been issued, a virtually unprecedented step. And unlike the international court, the Israeli Supreme Court has the power to enforce judgments. Despite the understandable controversy that the Israeli Supreme Court's decision provoked in Israel, understandable because it will cost Israeli lives, the Israeli government immediately announced that it will comply with the decision of its own Supreme Court. In fact, implementation has already begun. Mr. Speaker, Israel is the only state in the Middle East where an Arab can take his government to court and stands a good chance of winning. But, Mr. Speaker, the language of the international court's opinion suggests that Israel has no right of self-defense although it clearly has that right under article 51 of the U.N. charter against terrorist groups that kill innocent civilians. I fully support Israel's right to build a fence to protect itself from the plague of terrorism, and I call on our administration and all members of the U.N. Security Council to reject any effort to look for Security Council validation for this repugnant international court ruling should such a misguided effort be made. Mr. Speaker, I strongly support the resolution. I urge all of my colleagues to do likewise. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps), my neighbor and colleague. (Mrs. CAPPS asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley), who has been the leader on this issue on our side.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume, and I rise in strong support of this legislation. First, I want to commend my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce), for his leadership on this issue, and indeed on so many other matters. Mr. Speaker, the terrorist organization known as the Lord's Resistance Army has turned northern Uganda into a living hell for the Acholi people, and particularly their children, for years now. Under the ruthless and delusional leadership of Joseph Kony, this terrorist organization maintains a vicious hit-and-run guerrilla war with the Ugandan government where the overwhelming casualties are the Acholi people, particularly kidnapped boys and girls. While Kony invokes the name of God in his unholy war against innocent civilians, it has been the backing of the Sudanese government in Khartoum that has kept this war going for so many years. Several months ago, our committee hosted a young woman, Grace Akallo, who was abducted by this terrorist group at age 13 and was forced to live as a sex slave. As part of her induction, she, along with other girls, were forced to beat an old woman to death. After living that nightmare, she then was taken to southern Sudan, trained by the Arabs, as she called them, and forced to fight for Khartoum against the Sudanese People's Liberation Army. Grace escaped this terrorist group and the Sudanese forces, and on her own made her way to a safe place in Uganda. She will be going to school next year here in the United States. However, as moving and heroic as Grace's story is, it is the extreme exception. The more common and familiar story for a young Acholi girl captured by this terrorist outfit is rape, other physical brutality, slavery, and a broken life. Mr. Speaker, with approval of this resolution today, Congress will stand fast in the face of the horrors perpetrated directly or indirectly by Khartoum by demanding an end to the conflict in northern Uganda. We will also strongly signal to the administration and to the international community that every possible step must be taken to protect peace and the security of these children. Mr. Speaker, I urge all of my colleagues to support this important bill. Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers on this side, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 688. Mr. Speaker, this important resolution commends the government of Portugal and the people of Portugal for the long-time friendship and support in the war on international terrorism. I would like to thank my California colleagues, the gentleman from California (Mr. Nunes), the gentleman from California (Mr. Pombo), and the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardoza) for introducing this important initiative. Mr. Speaker, the United States and Portugal have shared a long history of friendship and mutual support. I owe a special personal debt of gratitude to Portugal because of my wife, Annette. Portuguese consuls in several European capitals during the second World War extended protections to Jews, including in my own native city of Budapest, Hungary. Portuguese Consul General Branquinho together with the Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg were responsible for saving the life of my wife, Annette, during that period. Portugal admitted thousands of Jewish refugees during 1940 and 1941 and allowed rescue organization to operate in Lisbon. One of the heroes of the Holocaust was the Portuguese Consul General in Bordeaux, France, Aristides de Sousa Mendes, who issued as many as 10,000 Portuguese transit visas to refugees stranded in France in order that they might cross the Spanish frontier. In spite of the fact that he did not have his country's support for that action at that time, he courageously did the right thing and made a difference in saving the lives of so many potential Holocaust victims. I am particularly grateful to the current government of Portugal for their steadfast support of the United States in our fight against terrorism. Portugal has not only committed military personnel to fight against terrorism but also medical teams, police and others to assist in this effort. Portugal, our NATO ally, has authorized our forces to use their air base in the Azores for strategic staging, which is particularly critical in the War on Terrorism. Portugal is truly a friend who has stepped up to the plate to help the United States and the rest of the civilized community of nations many times and in many ways. We are grateful to have such a strong and steadfast ally, and we have every expectation and desire that the friendship between Portugal and the United States will continue to grow and to flourish for many years to come. I strongly support passage of this legislation. I urge all of my colleagues to do so as well. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H. Res. 615, introduced by the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), my good friend and distinguished colleague. For years, the democratic nation of Israel has been relegated to third-class status at the United Nations. Our resolution seeks to end this outrageous treatment of Israel, and it will ensure that Israel has the same rights and privileges at the United Nations in New York as every other nation in the world. The procedures of the United Nations are an arcane subject, Mr. Speaker; but it is vital to understand, one fact about that. For a member state to be able to exercise its full rights and privileges at the United Nations, for it to participate fully in all U.N. agencies and activities, it must be a full member of one of the five regional groupings of the U.N. And of the 191 member states in the U.N., only one is not a full member of one of the five regional groups. That one exception is the State of Israel. Israel's natural geographical home should be in the Asia Group; but that group, which is dominated by hostile Arab states that refuse to recognize the State of Israel, rejects the membership of the region's only democracy, the State of Israel. This unique and appalling constraint cripples Israel's ability to exercise normal privileges of U.N. membership. The normal privileges are enjoyed by every other member, from most democratic to the most despotic. It precludes Israel from voting in any United Nations body, except the General Assembly. It precludes Israel from running for a seat on the Security Council or any major U.N. affiliated agency, or from otherwise participating fully in the day-to-day work of the United Nations. To partially address this ability and after years of United States efforts, the regional block known as Western Europe and Others Group, WEOG, granted Israel limited temporary membership 4 years ago; but this junior-grade membership allows Israel to participate in only some of the U.N.'s less important activities. Democratic Israel clearly deserves to be a full member of the WEOG group. WEOG, unlike any other regional block, is not a geographic designation. It is a political grouping, including countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, along with all the states of Western Europe. Does anyone doubt that Israel fully shares the other WEOG states' core commitments to democracy and Western values? In fact, its voting record on almost all issues at the United Nations reflects this common ground with other WEOG states. Mr. Speaker, it is time for the WEOG group, whose membership roster is a who's who of our closest allies on this planet, to end the policy of discrimination against the State of Israel and to grant Israel full membership. There is simply no excuse for not doing so. The hypocritical treatment of Israel at the U.N. perhaps tops the list of the many reasons that this crucial world body so often evokes well-deserved cynicism and scorn. Consider this. At this moment, the thugish Sudanese regime that is responsible for some of the worst violence and ethnic cleansing in the world today sits at the head of the U.N. Human Rights Commission, a body that democratic Israel cannot even aspire to join. Ask the thousands of people in Darfur in the western Sudan who have been driven from their homes into refugee camps by Khartoum-sponsored Arab militias whether this is fair. Mr. Speaker, a vote for this resolution is a vote for Israel's full participation in the U.N. system, a vote for our own national interest, and a vote for enhanced U.N. credibility. I strongly support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to do so. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Engel), my good friend and distinguished colleague.